Skip to main content

About your Search

20120925
20121003
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
on the line and we have an obligation to go after them and i do think president obama has been right to wage a tough campaign against al qaeda. al qaeda it is an enemy of the united states. host: we had this headline in " the washington times." "tells support for the rebels -- total support for the rebels." what is your take? guest: at least 25,000 people have died in syria. president obama said the right thing yesterday. the dictator of syria has to go. there has to be in the government. the syrian government is just strong enough to stay in power. they seem to be evenly matched. there doesn't seem to be a clear winner in this war. russia and china are blocking every attempt by the u.n. security council to help the refugees or the rebel alliance or to give a straight message to the dictator in syria. so they are no help. president obama does not want to intervene with troops because it would take too many american troops. i think he is made the right decision not to put american troops in. women have to consider arming the rebels -- we now have to consider arm the rebels. these poor people
the years before obama. no regulations on wall street. it's very worrisome. i think obama is doing the right thing trying to regulate especially on wall street, because wall street is a funding tunnel of getting money out of this country and not taxing the rich. host: money is in oklahoma, republican. good morning. caller: the man before me was just on the talking points of the democrats. the vice-president does not make a difference to me. but the president does. when this man obama gets in there again, people are going to suffer. hen hea terrible thing wen wants us to be a third world country and the like all the rest of the countries. we're not like all the rest of the country's. we fought not to be like all the rest of the countries. the polls are skewed. they did not ask me. there are plenty of other people they did not ask either. so there are plenty of people who will vote for romney. he will be surprised when that day comes. host: thanks for calling. lots of financial stories in the papers today. the front page of the new york times this morning has the story about the payroll tax. t
anything to get into the race cycle with obama and romney? host: what do you say? guest: right now i'm excluded from the first debate. the commission is the presidential debate commission and that is private and made up of republicans and democrats with no interest in seeing a third voice on stage. we have filed three lawsuits to get me on stage based on other third-party candidates who have filed lawsuits. there doesn't seem to be much hope. we filed on the antitrust round, something that has not been done before. host: how much do these debates matter and what are you looking for to hearing on wednesday? guest: the debates are tantamount to me having a chance of winning. you can close the lid on winning the election. is winning getting enough votes to cause one of the other two who ends up winning to give more than just lip service to these issues? potentially. i view this as a victory every single day. there are so many people -- i think i speak on behalf of the majority of americans. i think they consider themselves fiscally responsible and socially respecting. i am in that broad
america should be. and america during world war ii protected italy -- i'm getting nervous now. obama is a marxist. he does not believe in the way of the the united states. the american people better wake- up. we will lose our rights little by little. i want money to be spent on defense. host: do we outspend most of the world on defense spending? guest: we spend most of the rest of the world. try to compare in the state's spending and china is impossible. labor rates are different. you cannot live it up and say this, this, and this -- cannot line it up. this is the way history has gone. there is a benefit to our citizens to maintaining an appropriate balance in peace in this world. the caller was talking about the way things were back in world war ii. was a time when the united states went into war without the proper equipment. we had people training with broomsticks because they did not have rifles. cars have a sign that said "tank" to give them the idea of what it would be like when they hit the beaches in europe. we never want to be in that position again. "we can just pull back."
me add another thought -- if obama, in fact, continues where he is now and wins the election, i think there is a very good chance that the republican party could split in half. you might have a far right party, a tea party, let's say, and a more moderate centrist republican party that might appeal to certain centrist democrats. i think it is possible if the election ends up where it is now that there would be a third party in our future. it would be similar to the election of 1860 where the democratic party split over the issue of slavery with the northern democratic party and a southern democratic party and that is the first time the republicans won national office with lincoln. a similar think it happen this time. if mitt romney wins, they will stick together, obviously. if they do not win, i think there is a chance that the republicans could come apart at the seams. host: this is a hypothetical because the polls indicate it will happen but of one party or the other were to gain the white house, the house, and the senate, would that be better? could we get more done as a country? gu
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)